About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
to the pentagon and the i.g. on the one hand and to the f.b.i. with regards to general petraeus. >> he's not -- big picture watching, he's not shaking his head saying, guys, we need a more credible, competent sense of leadership? >> he's not going to make grand pronouncements or decisions about things based on two situations, two individual cases. he's focused on the missions that the military is tasked with carrying out and the c.i.a. and the general intelligence community is tasked with carrying out and with enacting his overall agenda. which encompasses not just national security policy but obviously domestic polcy. -- policy. yes. >> jay, has the president spoken to general allen directly? >> not that i'm aware of, no. >> secretary panetta? >> i'd have to check that. secretary panetta has been traveling. >> as sort after follow-up, does the president see this in general as an unwelcomed distraction at a time when he's just -- was re-elected and has a bunch of priorities in terms of the fiscal cliff and his cabinet? >> i certainly i think wouldn't call it welcome. obviously the -- a
of interests when the f.b.i. is investigating information that involves the director of the c.i.a., when you have an attorney general that has information that needs to go immediately to the commander-in-chief, to the president of the country, we need to find out, did it go there, and if not, why not. and if so, and what is the president doing with this information because now he's saying he didn't get it until after the election. why so long? what are the problems here? why are the stories different? why are the stores told different from the evidence those people had in hair thands when -- hands when they told those stories the answers need to be found and there's clearly a conflict of interest. we do not need to return to the days of an f.b.i. director who investigates not to report to the commander in chief but to gather information so that he can get it and use it or provide toyota someone else who can use it to force people do what they want. so what happens when f.b.i. director who comes into office honorably with the best of intentions as it appears j. edgar hoover did, to battle org
was on "state of the union" this week, expressing concerns over when the fbi, the white house, and members of congress knew about the investigation. [video clip] >> i have questions about the whole matter. how to the fbi have been investigating it for this long? and if the general was involved, to me, if it was, the fbi director had the obligation to tell the head of the council at the earliest date. seems to have been going on for several months, but now it seems the fbi did not realize it until election day? it just does not add up, you have this kind of investigation, the fbi investigating emails, taking four months to find out that the cia director was involved? i have real questions about this. the time line has to be analyzed to see what happened. >> it looks like general petraeus will not be testifying this week at the hearings that we talked about on the september 11 incident in benghazi. here is the headline -- "lawmakers have questions." host: we are getting your fallout this morning from all the papers. this from christine -- host: like i said, we are getting your thoughts this
have a standing army of armed bureaucrats and the t.s.a., c.i.a., f.b.i., fish and wildlife, corps of engineers, etc.,p citizens are protch guilty until proven innocent in the constitutional administrative corgets. government in a free society should have no authority to meddle into social activities or the economic transactions of individuals. nor should government meddle in the affairs of other nations. all things peaceful, even when controversial should be permitted. we must reject the notion of prior restraint in economic activity just as we do in the area of free speech and religious liberty. but even in these areas government is starting to use a backdoor approach of political correctness to regulate speech, a very dangerous trend. since 9/11, monitoring speech on the internet is now a problem since warrants are no longer required. the proliferation of federal crimes. the constitution established four federal crimes. today the experts can't even agree on how many federal crimes are now on the books. they number into the thousands. no one person request comprehend the enormity
serious situation. there's a lot of concern about the fact that the f.b.i. didn't come back for three weeks. the reason is when they had to go back they needed protection. they needed to make sure that their lives were not at risk again. and we had to rely in the beginning with a very unorganized government and security group who was working with us and that was the libyans themselves. >> can you explain rice's comments five days later? why that was still the line of spontaneous -- >> we talked some about susan rice. susan rice got a lot of the same information that we did. i'll make a comparison to colin powell. when colin powell went before the united nations, getting information from the administration on the facts. >> you said that within 24 hours -- [inaudible] this was five days later. >> i said they knew right away that there were terrorists involved in the operation. >> why wasn't that part -- >> wait, are you finished? what? give it to me. >> in other words, if he knew within 24 hours it was terrorist-related, how come five days later in the talking points for susan rice it s
organizations to freely operate on twitter is enabling the enemy. the f.b.i. and twitter must recognize sooner than later the social media has a tool for the outlaw terrorists, and it has to stop and that's just the way if is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from california is recognized. >> mr. speaker, as the republican of georgia deals with its first democratic transition of power, i spent the last few days speaking at length with the president and the new prime minister about the necessity to continue the pursuit of the rule of law. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, this is a critical moment for the georgian people that can either put the country on a path of sustainable democracy or turn back the clock on the tremendous gains that have been made since the rose revolution. mr. speaker, the united states must remain engaged with the new government to promo
government. there'd be no embassy security new york f.b.i. agents, no food inspection, no federal prisons, no f.b.i., no head start, no aid to education. ms. moore: no fina, highway spending. mr. scott: no fema. nothing. ms. moore: except tax cuts. mr. scott: you would have to cut everything to fund tax cuts. if you extend the tax cuts without offsetting with over revenues you have to go into social security and medicare. that's why ewhen they talk about reduce the size of government that's why they can't tell you what they're going to cut. they can't cut that much. when they talk about cutting corporate loopholes, they can't tell you what they are because they don't add to that much. ms. moore: mr. scott, thanks for that background. i want to set the record straight. on the hike that the greant old party is leading us to believe, that number one extending tax cut the bush era tax cuts is not spending. it is exactly spending. and that is -- and the belief, the faulty belief that our, you know, our spending on safety net programs is driving our debt. social security does not drive the debt
the fbi were investigating american torture, rather than american love affairs. and this struck me with security contractors. we have had two months of heated controversy about benghazi and what happened. it was bad. four americans were killed. hundreds of security contractors were killed in iraq. i have written two books on iraq and i have never been able to figure out an exact number. the answer is no one cares and no one seems to care still. the official tally leaves out at least 57 incidents that we know about. the tally is quite suspect. this puts aside the foreign security contractors, south africans, costa ricans. there seems to be no tally of this at all and nobody cares. i have got to wonder how much of the mess in benghazi is simply fueled by fox news, poisoning the american bloodstream. it really bothers me. i compare that to the total carelessness about the deaths of security contractors in iraq. >> thomas ricks writes a blog on foreign policies website. ricks. foreignpolicy.com. he is the author of many books, including a new book called "the generals." let's hear from
judgment on the f.b.i. he also talked about issues like the fiscal cliff. here's the front page of the arizona republic. we get this courtesy of the new see yum. obama jumps back into the d.c. fray. patrick, rockville, maryland, democrats line, good morning. caller: good morning. what i have to say is projecting weakness and disorganization as a whole to the public will not help this country. people need to basically try to fix the country, in my opinion. and if something like benghazi happened, we should be able to find out what happened privately and take steps to make sure it doesn't happen again. that's all i have to say. host: gale joins us now from wisconsin on our republican line. hi. caller: hi, there. how are you this morning? host: where are you in wisconsin? caller: milwaukee area. i just wanted to make a comment that i certainly don't have any confidence in the security team. the reason i don't have confidence is if you're going to go out in front of public and just be a puppet and say everything that you're told to say, not speak the truth to the people like this ad
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)